Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX versus S/S ASHA CABLES OIL PVT. LTD.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Commissioner Trade Tax v. S/S Asha Cables Oil Pvt. Ltd. - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 956 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 3058 (10 February 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO.55

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.956 OF 2004

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.973 OF 2004

AND

TRADE TAX REVISION NO.974 OF 2004

The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow. ....Applicant

Versus

S/S Asha Edible Oil Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur. ....Opp. Party

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

These three revisions under section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 27.12.2003 for the assessment years 1987-88, 89-90, and 90-91 under the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred as "Central Act").

Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as "Dealer") was carrying on the business of manufacture and sales of mustard oil and oil cake by solvent extraction process. Dealer was registered under Central Sales T M/s Kamla Dials and Devices, Solan (Himachal Pradesh)ax Act for the items, plant and machinery, generator set, weighing machine, tools, mill stores, fire extinguisher, office equipment and other utility items. During the aforesaid years, dealer had purchased N-Hexien, M-Hexien, mustard cake Oil and soyabeen from outside the State of U.P. and issued Form C in respect thereof. Assessing authority levied the penalty under section 10-A of the Central Act for the alleged violation of section 10 (b) of the Central Act on the ground that the aforesaid items in respect of which Form C was issued, dealer was not registered. Dealer filed appeals before the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Trade Tax, Kanpur.  All the appeals have been allowed and the penalty orders have been set aside. Commissioner of Trade Tax  filed appeals before the Tribunal. Tribunal by the impugned order rejected all the appeals. Tribunal and the first appellate authority held that dealer was registered for other utility items and the items in respect of which Form C were issued were items of utility and used in the manufacturing.  Tribunal and the first appellate authority accepted the plea of the dealer that dealer had issued Form C while making the purchases under the bonafide belief that these items were covered under other utility items.

Heard learned Standing Counsel.

I do not find any error in the order of Tribunal Section 10 (b) of Central Act reads as follows:

10. Penalties--If any person---

(b) being a registered dealer, falsely represents when purchasing any class of goods that goods of such class are covered by his certificate of registration; or"

Penalty under section 10-A of Central Act, for the alleged violation of section 10 (b) of Central Act, can not be levied unless a case of mis-representation is made out. Mis-representation mean that while making the purchases, dealer issued Form C knowingly that it was not registered for such items.  In case, if the Form C was issued under the bonafide belief that in respect of such items, it was registered, the provisions of section 10 (b) of Central Act can not be invoked.  In the present case, both the appellate authorities found that dealer was registered for "other utility items" and Form C issued in respect of N-Hexien, M-Hexien, Mustard oil cake and soyabeen were the items of utility and have been used in the manufacturing, inasmuch as dealer was eligible for the benefit of concessional rate of tax in respect of the aforesaid items. Finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact and does not require any interference.

In the result, all the revisions fail and are accordingly, dismissed.

Dt.10.02.2006

R./


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.